Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy (RALUC): a systematic review of its applications.

Theodoros Spinos, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Vasileios Tatanis, Kristiana Gkeka, Angelis Peteinaris, Anja Dietel, Ho Thi Phuc, Doreen Trebst, Stefan Siemer, Toni Franz, Evangelos Liatsikos, Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg

Journal: World journal of urology 2025;44(1):47

PMID: 41405725

Abstract

PURPOSE

Ureterocalicostomy refers to the anastomosis between the lower pole calyces and the ureter. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureterocalicostomy (RALUC) is gaining ground, ultimately. The current systematic review summarizes all applications of RALUC in both adults and children.

METHODS

In line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines, three databases (PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane) were screened, from their inception to 16 February 2025. The following search string was used: robotic AND (ureterocalicostomy OR ureterocalicostomies OR ureterocalycostomy OR ureterocalycostomies).

RESULTS

Eight studies fulfilled all inclusion criteria and were finally considered for qualitative synthesis. The rate of patients who had undergone previous pyeloplasty ranged in included studies from 20% to 100%, while the rate of patients who had undergone a nephrostomy tube placement before the ureterocalicostomy ranged from 38% to 100%. Total operative time ranged from 157.6 (90-240) to 272 min, while estimated blood loss ranged from 27.5 (10-75) to 115 (50-200) mL. Reoperation rates ranged from 0% to 50%, while the success rates ranged from 66.7% to 100%. Finally, taking into consideration the Clavien-Dindo Classification System, the Grade I-II complications ranged from 0% to 40%, while the Grade III-IV ones ranged from 0% to 20%.

CONCLUSION

RALUC is a feasible, safe and efficient procedure for patients with complicated ureteropelvic junction obstruction. The implementation of higher-quality studies on larger samples, including comparative ones and randomized controlled trials, is crucial in order to draw safer conclusions.

© 2025. The Author(s).

Address: Department of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.; Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.; Department of Urology, University of Saarland, Homburg, Germany.; Department of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.; Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.; Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany. [email protected].
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.